' SYED ALLY MADAD SHAH (CHAIRMAN).--Appellant Nazar Hussain, who was a Junior Clerk in the Office of Inspector-General, Frontier Corps, N.-W.F.P., Peshawar, has preferred this appeal against the rejection of his request for withdrawing his application for premature retirement from service.
The impugned order is dated 31-8-1987.
2. The appellant made an application dated 17-11-1986 for his retirement from service. He made an another application dated 27-11-1986 that he may also be allowed L.P.R. For one year from 1-1-1987 to 31-9-1987. He was granted L.P.R., and allowed retirement from service as per order dated 8-12- 1986. Somewhere in the month of August, 1987, he made an application for withdrawal of his request for retirement from service and permission to rejoin the service. He was informed under letter dated 13-8-1987 that his request could not be acceded to under the rules. He preferred departmental appeal which was dismissed as per communication to him dated 25-10-1987. He then preferred this appeal on 28-11-1987.
3. The appellant argued the appeal himself. He alleged that he was forced to make an application for retirement; and he realised later that he could have continued in service and therefore he made an application that the L.P.R. Granted might be cancelled and his request for retirement might be permitted to be withdrawn and he be taken on duty. He contended that he could withdraw his request for proceeding on retirement before he could actually proceed on retirement and he had made the request for withdrawing the application during the course of L.P.R. He has placed reliance on a case cited as PLD 1981 Kar.
56.
4. The respondents have opposed the appeal. They have stated that the appellant voluntarily applied on 7-11-1986 for retirement from service and he reiterated that request in an another application dated 27-11-1986, wherein he requested for L.P.R. Before his retirement. Their contention is that the appellant was granted L.P.R. Vide order dated 8-12-1986 and he made application for cancellation of L.P.R. On 23-8-1987 and his request could not be acceded to and he was informed so under letter dated 11-8-1987. The learned counsel for the respondents has argued that the appellants' case was governed by Rules 465-B of the Civil Service Regulations (C.S.R.), which originally laid down that an intimation for retirement from service, once submitted, was final and could not be modified or withdrawn; but that bar was modified later to the extent that an application for premature retirement could be withdrawn before its acceptance by the competent authority. He has urged that since the appellant's request for premature retirement was granted by the competent authority before his request for withdrawing his application for retirement and, therefore, his request was rightly rejected. According to him, the case relied upon by the appellant is not applicable to his case.
5. The events referred to above reveal that the appellant made an application dated 7-11-1987 for premature retirement and he supplemented it by another application dated 27-11-1986 making additional request that he may be allowed L.P.R. For one year from 1-1-1987 to 31-12-1987. His request was granted as per order dated 8-12-1986. He made an application for withdrawing his request for retirement on or about 23-8-1987. Since his application for premature retirement had already been granted by the competent authority and he had availed of L.P.R. For more than seven months, he could not withdraw his application for premature retirement as laid down under C.S.R.
465-B. The case relied upon by the appellant PLD 1981 Karachi 56 (Abdul Ghaffar and Mustafa Khan and 5 others) rather stands against the proposition advanced by him. It was observed therein that one could retire from service by voluntarily submitting an application and it was not necessary for a person to retire from service on superannuation only. In that case reference was made to a case of Ahmed Khan v. Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Interior Karachi wherein it was observed that resignation could be withdrawn or recalled before its acceptance by competent authority. The same principle is laid down under C.S.R. 465-B in respect of request made for premature retirement. Thus, the appeal filed by the appellant has no merit and it is dismissed accordingly.
Appeal rejected.